Give enough time, can you illustrate absolutely anything

Today we cannot simulate accurately the entire universe. It's not a computation problem, it's a knowledge problem.

So... no.

But if in the "Give enough time" you count the research time, it's... possible? Unprovable question I suppose.

>>61982479
But we could try simulating the universe according to our known laws of physics and see what would go wrong or differently than in our current universe then study the part we don't understand to expand our knowledge of the laws of physics and universe

>>61982554
As I said, if "Give enough time" include research time (and if the human race does not fallout) it's... possible.

>>61982479
>But if in the "Give enough time" you count the research time, it's... possible?
What about godel's incompleteness theorem?

Given enough time, anything is possible. Simply from the random arrangement of atoms you'll get something with enough time.

Giving something enough time is not a good condition.

>>61982928
Good though, good though...

But as said >>61982988 , "research time" can include "just wait until random atoms give the good result".

"Give enough time" is just retard for computation + physics questions

>>61982928
Whenever another independent problem arises, just add another axiom. Easy every time.